Monthly Archives: March 2013

Easter eggs? Check. Gay pride flag? Check. Not one mention of sin? Check. Anti-biblical statements on why Jesus was killed? Check. Anti-biblical statements on the resurrection? Check. Explicit denial of the atonement? Check. It must be an Easter sermon by false teacher Chuck “Jesus is not the only way” Currie:

Theologians and lay people debate to this day whether or not Jesus was physically raised or whether the disciples (and later Paul) interacted with the spirit of Christ. Like Marcus Borg and others, I think that debate asks the wrong questions. It doesn’t matter. What matters is in ways that may very well surpass human understanding Jesus revealed himself after the cross with the ones he taught and loved, and that his spirit still moves many today in wondrous ways.

Jesus did not go to the cross as part of some vengeful God’s need for a sacrifice. He went to the cross because the Roman authorities saw the Kingdom of God as a threat to the Empire of Rome. Crucifixion was a crime reserved for enemies of the state. Jesus went knowing what his fate would be but believing there are ideas and principles worth dying for.

Note how Chuck teaches the opposite of the Bible in literally every sentence. He doesn’t have a single verse to back any of that up.

Run, don’t walk, from fakes like Currie who steer people to Hell.

Hear the good news: Jesus came to die for lost sinners. Repent and trust in him, then God will adopt you, forgive all your sins and bring you to be with him for eternity.

This exchange in particular was the most glaringly infuriating as White, a proponent of same-sex marriage who angered his own congregation recently because of his adamant belief that Christianity supports such a practice, went so far as to agree that Jesus Christ was wrong about His position on marriage being defined as one man and one woman, and if Jesus were alive today he would, in fact, support gay marriage.

It is very common for the fakes to sit in judgment of God, but rarely do they take off the sheepskin so completely and say it outright. In a weird way I appreciate people who are so transparently fake.

100% of the verses addressing homosexual behavior denounce it as sin in the clearest and strongest possible terms.

100% of the verses referring to God’s ideal for marriage involve one man and one woman.

100% of the verses referencing parenting involve moms and dads with unique roles (or at least a set of male and female parents guiding the children).

0% of 31,173 Bible verses refer to homosexual behavior in a positive or even benign way or even hint at the acceptability of homosexual unions.

* 1. “The Bible says homosexuality is wrong but it isn’t the word of God” (obviously non-Christians) 2. “The Bible says it is wrong but God changed his mind” (only about 10 things wrong with that) 3. “The Bible is the word of God but you are just misunderstanding it” (Uh, no, not really.)

That means they don’t operate by biblical principles, they just follow whatever makes them popular with the world. Shocking, eh?

1 John 2:15–16 (ESV) 15Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16For all that is in the world—the desires of the flesh and the desires of the eyes and pride of life—is not from the Father but is from the world.

Like the religious leaders, you can focus all your energies on the things you don’t like about other people. Instead of dealing with their own issues, they obsessed over getting Jesus.

You can try to make up for your mistakes, like Judas giving back the money he had received. The problem is, of course, that you can’t un-ring a bell, and you can’t undo your sins.

You can give in to despair, stew in your guilt, and let it eat you alive, as Judas did.

Or you can repent, as Peter did. You can bring your sin before God for mercy and put things in place that will help you change the way you live.

—

It is morbidly ironic that nearly all the people posting the red equal signs for the faux “equality” of “same-sex marriage” are pro-abortion. They fight aggressively to turn society upside down for 0.1% of the country (3% of people are lesbian/gay but less than 3% of those want to get married), but they ignore the equal protection for unborn and unwanted human beings.

As long as there are still Christians who actually follow Christ and uphold his word, a vast amount of people around the world — never mind Islam — will never ever see gay marriage as anything other than a legal encroachment of God’s intent.

So those Christians must be silenced. The left exerted a great deal of energy to convince everyone that the gay lifestyle is an alternative form of normal. It then has exerted a great deal of energy convincing people that because the gay lifestyle is just another variation of normal, gay marriage must be normalized.

Meanwhile, those Christians are out there saying it is not normal and are refusing to accept it as normal because of silly God dared to say marriage is a union between a man and woman.

Any Christian who refuses to recognize that man wants to upend God’s order will have to be driven from the national conversation. They will be labeled bigots and ultimately criminals.

Already we have seen florists, bakers, and photographers suffer because they have refused to go along with the cultural shift toward gay marriage. There will be more.

Once the world decides that real marriage is something other than natural or Godly, those who would point it out must be silenced and, if not, punished. The state must be used to do this. Consequently, the libertarian pipe dream of getting government out of marriage can never ever be possible.

Within a year or two we will see Christian schools attacked for refusing to admit students whose parents are gay. We will see churches suffer the loss of their tax exempt status for refusing to hold gay weddings. We will see private businesses shut down because they refuse to treat as legitimate that which perverts God’s own established plan. In some places this is already happening.

Christians should, starting yesterday, work on a new front. While we should not stop the fight to preserve marriage, and we may be willing to compromise on civil unions, we must start fighting now for protections for religious objectors to gay marriage.

Are the Polyamorists Next in Line for Marriage Equality? The LGBTQ people know not to move too fast. They could care less about the polyamorists but realize that the “slippery slope” isn’t a fallacy in this case. It is a cliff, not a slope. Validating “same-sex unions” isn’t tweaking the definition of marriage, it is saying that marriage is whatever someone wants to call it. The polyamorists and other perverts will use the same arguments that the gay lobby has.

There was an interesting article in the Washington Post last week about some polyamory activists in the Unitarian-Universalist Church. It seems the folks fighting for so-called “marriage equality” would prefer the polyamorists keep quiet. The last thing the same-sex marriage advocate want is for the real marriage activists to say, “I told you so.” The article cites a group called Unitarian-Universalist for Polyamory Awareness (UUPA). This group defines polyamory as the “practice of loving and relating intimately with more than one other person at a time.” Among the goals of the UUPA is to have their relationships blessed by a minister.

—

As Stan reminds us, the Hippocratic Oath was written 500 years before Jesus came to earth yet it strongly and clearly opposed abortion. Abortion is so clearly wrong that it took Satan 2,500 years to convince non-believers that it was, in a morbid irony, a “human right,” and only a few years more than that to convince much of the church. The fake part.

Definitely not. An abortion kills the life of a baby after it has begun. It is dangerous to your life and health. It may make you sterile so that when you want a child you cannot have it. Birth control merely postpones the meaning of life.

There you have it! Straight from the experts at Planned Parenthood.

—

—

This picture makes a good point, but it is actually much worse than this. Gun training programs are truthful in sharing the real risks. Planned Parenthood deliberately gives a false sense of security and pretends that people will follow their ridiculous recommendations.

Planned Parenthood kills babies for a living, they systematically hide statutory rape and sex trafficking, they encourage kids to have all sorts of out-of-wedlock sex and pretend that it can be done without risks, and so much more. Yet one of their representatives managed to shock people during a public hearing. Watch it yourself:

She and Planned Parenthood, like Barack Obama before her, are fighting the restrictions against withholding medical care and killing infants who survive abortions. She specifically says that the decision regarding what to do about the baby on the table is between the mother and the “healthcare provider.” (She initially said the family, then thought better of those implications and reverted to just the mother later in her testimony). And while this question may not have been asked, presumably she would insist that taxpayers fund the killing of the baby on the table.

Apparently the horrors of being a little too far away from a hospital were too much for Planned Parenthood to take, so speaking like Dr. Nick Riviera of The Simpsons, just to be on the safe side they need to be allowed to kill the baby.

Of course it is spectacularly evil to withhold care or directly kill a baby on a table. Just because the abortionist failed on the first try doesn’t mean he deserves a second shot. Anyone without a warped moral compass would agree. But who are the inconsistent ones? I submit that she is entirely consistent with the Democrats’ platform of abortions without restrictions, funded by taxpayers.

Remember, the successful abortion would have had the mother and child in the same room, with an irrelevant change in the distance between them. Everyone in the video seems to concede that. This Planned Parenthood representative would have been entirely consistent in saying the following (channeling Hillary Clinton):

With all due respect, the fact is we end up with a dead baby who wasn’t wanted by her mother. Was it because she was killed slightly inside the mother or slightly outside? What difference at this point does it make?

And she would be right. While killing the baby on the table seems worse, it is morally equal to the abortion. (Speaking of red equal signs . . .)

And if those babies can be killed, why not any baby delivered naturally?

I love the free market and our ability to choose where to shop. If we get bad service or don’t like the worldview of the seller, we don’t have to give them any money. Or we can steer our spending to companies with great service and similar beliefs.

I’m not aggressively into boycotts, but when companies are in your face with their dogma and I can conveniently go somewhere else, I will. But I have to concede that even though the pro-“same-sex marriage” people are hopelessly on the wrong side of the issue, part of their point here is valid:

It should be no surprise that many companies would succumb to political correctness for profit, just as many people will say the opposite of the truth to be more popular. I used to work for HP and they gave into to the “gaystapo” lobby and their boycott threats along with the pressures of some LGBT people in the company.

But you really will need to live in a cave if you think you can survive by only shopping where people completely agree with your worldview. Feel free to go where you like, but most of the time you’ll just be going where someone hates your worldview and you just don’t know it (yet).

Obviously, their “wrong side of history” bit is wrong, especially considering that 99% of people with that view are also pro-abortion.

I just choose to remind people that if you are going to use an equal sign, then the things on each side need to actually be equal. In this case, they are not. The notion of “marriage equality” it is false because it implies that any union of two people is equal to real marriage. Or that the number of people in the marriage isn’t important.

But there are two very important things that same-sex unions can’t do.

1. By nature and design, 100% of children are produced by one man and one woman. That doesn’t mean marriages have to produce children, just that they are only produced by one male and one female, and that the government is interested in those relationships because of that possibility.

2. Only male/female relationships can provide a mother and father to a child — the intuitive ideal supported by countless studies.

Those are the reasons the government has traditionally been involved in marriages. No one is preventing gays from associating with each other (the government won’t even shut down bath houses!).

And yet, at the risk of inflaming many of my Christian friends who often exercise their American right to choose to boycott a company that makes this or that anti-Christian statement, here is just some food for thought:

Should we as Christians expect lost people to act in any other way than lost people generally do?

That is to say, should we expect lost people to not have animosity toward Christians? Can we look at history, perhaps, to help us get our bearings on this? The fact is that the world in which the very first Christians found themselves was a world that was incredibly hostile to biblical Christianity, and filled with wickedness and depravity, including rampant homosexuality. And yet, I feel certain that the Christians of that time interacted in the business world. And I do not see Scriptures exhorting Christians to not buy from this or that leather craftsman or olive purveyor, based on that person’s presumably anti-Christian views.

And also, lest we forget, the Bible makes it clear that the world will have animosity toward both us and God’s Word:

“For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing….” (1 Corinthians 1:18a)

“You will be hated by all for my name’s sake. But the one who endures to the end will be saved.” (Matthew 10:22)

I was getting breakfast recently at the Hampton Inn (Mmmmmm . . . waffles) and heard an employee in the kitchen singing Power in the Blood ( “. . . in the precious blood of the lamb . . .”). I leaned in to tell her that I liked that song and we shared a smile. Then without thinking I leaned back in and mentioned that we had just been singing it at a prison ministry weekend.

Her co-worker walked out with me and thanked me for the ministry. I didn’t think much of it at first, but she repeated it and then leaned in with tears in her eyes and said that her son was locked up and how she really appreciated people going to minister in prisons. We talked for a minute then she gave me a giant hug. Please pray for Valerie and her son and that God will send people to him with the truth and love of Jesus.

It reminded me of how effective and important well-run prison ministry programs can be.

Thanks and blessings to all the people who have established and are running these programs!

—–

Also see Kairos Prison Ministry. I’ve leading a weekend program this October, so if you are in Houston area and would like to participate on the inside or outside team, or just come to see the closing program to hear how the weekend helped the offenders, please let me know!